Stem Cell Reviews and Reports

, Volume 12, Issue 4, pp 438–447 | Cite as

A Dichotomy of Information-Seeking and Information-Trusting: Stem Cell Interventions and Children with Neurodevelopmental Disorders

  • Kimberly Sharpe
  • Nina Di Pietro
  • Karen J. Jacob
  • Judy Illes


Parents and primary caregivers of children with Cerebral Palsy (CP) and Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD) are faced with difficult treatment choices and management options for their children. The potential of stem cell technologies as an interventional strategy for CP and ASD has gained attention in the last decade. Information about these interventions varies in quality, resulting in a complex landscape for parent decision making for a child’s care. Further complicating this landscape are clinics that advertise these interventions as a legitimate treatment for a fee. In this study, we surveyed individuals who considered taking their child with ASD or CP abroad for stem cell interventions on their use of different sources of stem cell related health information and their level of trust in these sources. Participants reported that while the Internet was their most frequent source of information, it was not well-trusted. Rather, information sources trusted most were researchers and the science journals in which they publish, other parents of children with CP and ASD, and healthcare providers. These findings highlight a dichotomy between information-seeking preferences and information-trusted sources. We discuss the challenges of health science communication and present innovative opportunities to increase communication with trusted and reliable sources as part of an integrated multi-pronged approach.


Stem cells Cerebral palsy Autism spectrum disorder Stem cell interventions Trust Ethics 


  1. 1.
    Paneth, N., Hong, T., & Korzeniewski, S. (2006). The descriptive epidemiology of cerebral palsy. Clinics in Perinatology, 33(2), 251–267.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Williams, J. G., Higgins, J. P. T., & Brayne, C. E. G. (2006). Systematic review of prevalence studies of autism spectrum disorders. Archives of Disease in Childhood, 91(1), 8–15.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bubela, T., Li, M. D., Hafez, M., Bieber, M., & Atkins, H. (2012). Is belief larger than fact: expectations, optimism and reality for translational stem cell research. BMC Medicine, 10, 133.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4. [Internet] (2014). Identifier NCT01147653, Autologous umbilical cord blood infusion for children With Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD). Retrieved from
  5. 5. [Internet]. (2010). Identifier NCT01147653, A randomized study of autologous umbilical cord blood reinfusion in children with Cerebral Palsy. Retrieved from
  6. 6.
    Ogbogu, U., Rachul, C., & Caulfield, T. (2013). Reassessing direct-to-consumer portrayals of unproven stem cell therapies: is it getting better? Regenerative Medicine, 8(3), 361–369.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Lau, D., Ogbogu, U., Taylor, B., Stafinski, T., Menon, D., & Caulfield, T. (2008). Stem cell clinics online: the direct-to-consumer portrayal of stem cell medicine. Cell Stem Cell, 3(6), 591–594.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Petersen, A., & Seear, K. (2011). Technologies of hope: techniques of the online advertising of stem cell treatments. New Genetics and Society, 30(4), 329–346.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Ryan, K. A., Sanders, A. N., Wang, D. D., & Levine, A. D. (2010). Tracking the rise of stem cell tourism. Regenerative Medicine, 5(1), 27–33.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Sharpe, K., Di Pietro, N., & Illes, J. (2016). In the know and in the news: how science and the media communicate about stem cells, Autism and Cerebral Palsy. Stem Cell Reviews and Reports, 12(1), 1–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Zarzeczny, A., Rachul, C., Nisbet, M., & Caulfield, T. (2010). Stem cell clinics in the news. Nature Biotechnology, 28(12), 1243–1246. doi:10.1038/nbt1210-1243b.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Zarzeczny, A., & Caulfield, T. (2010). Stem cell tourism and doctors’ duties to minors--a view from Canada. The American Journal of Bioethics, 10(5), 3–15.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Murdoch, C. E., & Scott, C. T. (2010). Stem cell tourism and the power of hope. The American Journal of Bioethics, 10(5), 16–23.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Robillard, J. M., Cabral, E., Hennessey, C., Kwon, B. K., & Illes, J. (2015). Fueling hope: stem cells in social media. Stem Cell Reviews and Reports, 11(4), 540–546.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Master, Z., & Sipp, D. (2013). A role patient advocacy in countering the premature commercialization of stem cell interventions. The Monitor, 27, 26–30.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Kamenova, K., Reshef, A., & Caulfield, T. (2014). Representations of stem cell clinics on Twitter. Stem Cell Reviews and Reportseviews, 10(6), 753–760.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Rachul, C. (2011). “What have I got to lose ?”: an analysis of stem cell therapy patients ’ blogs. Health Law Review, 20(1), 5–12.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Petersen, A., Seear, K., & Munsie, M. (2014). Therapeutic journeys: the hopeful travails of stem cell tourists. Sociology of Health & Illness, 36(5), 670–685. doi:10.1111/1467-9566.12092.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Chen, H., & Gottweis, H. (2013). Stem cell treatments in China: rethinking the patient role in the global bio-economy. Bioethics, 27(4), 194–207. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8519.2011.01929.x.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Nyhan, B., Reifler, J., Richey, S., & Freed, G. L. (2014). Effective messages in vaccine promotion: a randomized trial. Pediatrics, 133(4), e835–e842. doi:10.1542/peds.2013-2365.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Benjaminy, S., Lo, C., & Illes, J. (2016). Social responsibility in stem cell research - is the news all bad? Stem Cell Reviews and Reports, 12(3), 269-275.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Master, Z., & Resnik, D. B. (2011). Hype and public trust in science. Science and Engineering Ethics, 19(2), 321–335. doi:10.1007/s11948-011-9327-6.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Crooks, V. A., Li, N., Snyder, J., Dharamsi, S., Benjaminy, S., Jacob, K. J., & Illes, J. (2015). “You don’t want to lose that trust that you’ve built with this patient…”: (dis)trust, medical tourism, and the Canadian family physician-patient relationship. BMC Family Practice, 16(1), 25.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Snyder, J., Adams, K., Chen, Y. Y., Birch, D., Caulfield, T., Cohen, I. G., … Zarzeczny, A. (2015). Navigating physicians’ ethical and legal duties to patients seeking unproven interventions abroad. Canadian Family Physician, 61(7), 584–586.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Reimer, J., Borgelt, E., & Illes, J. (2010). In pursuit of “informed hope” in the stem cell discourse. The American Journal of Bioethics, 10(5), 31–32.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Mechanic, D., & Meyer, S. (2000). Concepts of trust among patients with serious illness. Social Science & Medicine, 51(5), 657–668.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Möllering, G. (2006). Trust: Reason, routine, reflexivity. Oxford: Elesvier.Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Bates, S. R., Faulkner, W., Parry, S., & Cunningham-Burley, S. (2010). “How do we know it’s not been done yet?!’ Trust, trust building and regulation in stem cell research. Science and Public Policy, 37(9), 703–718.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Marrie, R. A., Salter, A. R., Tyry, T., Fox, R. J., & Cutter, G. R. (2013). Preferred sources of health information in persons with multiple sclerosis: degree of trust and information sought. Journal of Medical Internet Research, 15(4), e67.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Powell, J., Inglis, N., Ronnie, J., & Large, S. (2011). The characteristics and motivations of online health information seekers: cross-sectional survey and qualitative interview study. Journal of Medical Internet Research, 13(1), e20.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(77), 77–101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Beverly Hills: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Hesse, B. W., Nelson, D. E., Kreps, G. L., Croyle, R. T., Arora, N. K., Rimer, B. K., & Viswanath, K. (2005). Trust and sources of health information: the impact of the Internet and its implications for health care providers: findings from the first Health Information National Trends Survey. Archives of Internal Medicine, 165(22), 2618–2624.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Rainie, L., & Fox, S. (2001). The online health care revolution. The Internet’s powerful influence on “health seekers”. The Pew Internet & American Life Project. Retrieved from
  35. 35.
    Critchley, C. R. (2008). Public opinion and trust in scientists: the role of the research context, and the perceived motivation of stem cell researchers. Public Understanding of Science, 17(3), 309–327.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Literacy, I. of M. (US) C. on H. (2004). What is health literacy? National Academies Press (US). Retrieved from
  37. 37.
    Parker, R. (2000). Health literacy: a challenge for American patients and their health care providers. Health Promotion International, 15(4), 277–283.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Liu, X. (2009). Beyond science literacy: science and the public. International Journal of Environmental and Science Education, 4(3), 301–311.Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Nisbet, M. C., & Scheufele, D. A. (2009). What’s next for science communication? Promising directions and lingering distractions. American Journal of Botany, 96(10), 1767–1778.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    McCabe, H. (2008). The importance of parent-to-parent support among families of children with Autism in the People’s Republic of China. International Journal of Disability, Development and Education, 55(4), 303–314.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Johnston, R., Crooks, V. A., & Snyder, J. (2012). “I didn’t even know what I was looking for”: a qualitative study of the decision-making processes of Canadian medical tourists. Globalization and Health, 8(1), 23.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Rachul, C. (2011).“What have I got to lose?”: an analysis of stem cell therapy patients' blogs. Health Law Review, 20(1), 5-12.Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    Zarzeczny, A., & Clark, M. (2014). Unproven stem cell-based interventions and physicians’ professional obligations; a qualitative study with medical regulatory authorities in Canada. BMC Medical Ethics, 15(1), 75.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Johnston, R., Crooks, V. A., Snyder, J., & Dharamsi, S. (2013). Canadian family doctors’ roles and responsibilities toward outbound medical tourists: “Our true role is … within the confines of our system”. Canadian Family Physician, 59(12), 1314–1319.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Jacob, K. J., Kwon, B. K., Lo, C., Snyder, J., & Illes, J. (2015). Perspectives on strategies and challenges in the conversation about stem cells for spinal cord injury. Spinal Cord, 53(11), 811–815.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Levine, A. D., & Wolf, L. E. (2012). The roles and responsibilities of physicians in patients’ decisions about unproven stem cell therapies. The Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics, 40(1), 122–134.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Crooks, V. A., Kingsbury, P., Snyder, J., & Johnston, R. (2010). What is known about the patient’s experience of medical tourism? A scoping review. BMC Health Services Research, 10, 266.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Master, Z., Robertson, K., Frederick, D., Rachul, C., & Caulfield, T. (2014). Stem cell tourism and public education: the missing elements. Cell Stem Cell, 15(3), 267–270.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Moorhead, S. A., Hazlett, D. E., Harrison, L., Carroll, J. K., Irwin, A., & Hoving, C. (2013). A new dimension of health care: systematic review of the uses, benefits, and limitations of social media for health communication. Journal of Medical Internet Research, 15(4), e85.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Choo, E. K., Ranney, M. L., Chan, T. M., Trueger, N. S., Walsh, A. E., Tegtmeyer, K., … Carroll, C. L. (2015). Twitter as a tool for communication and knowledge exchange in academic medicine: a guide for skeptics and novices. Medical Teacher, 37(5), 411–6.Google Scholar
  51. 51.
    Kapp, J. M., Hensel, B., & Schnoring, K. T. (2015). Is Twitter a forum for disseminating research to health policy makers? Annals of Epidemiology, 25(12), 883–887.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Powell, D. A., Jacob, C. J., & Chapman, B. J. (2011). Using blogs and new media in academic practice: potential roles in research, teaching, learning, and extension. Innovative Higher Education, 37(4), 271–282.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Scott, C. T. (2015). The case for stem cell counselors. Stem Cell Reports, 4(1), 1–6.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Benjaminy, S., Kowal, S. P., MacDonald, I. M., & Bubela, T. (2015). Communicating the promise for ocular gene therapies: challenges and recommendations. American Journal of Ophthalmology, 160(3), 408–415.e2.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Office of Science and Technology & Wellcome Trust (2000). Science and the public: a review of science communication and public attitudes to science in Britain. Retrieved from

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Kimberly Sharpe
    • 1
  • Nina Di Pietro
    • 1
  • Karen J. Jacob
    • 1
  • Judy Illes
    • 1
  1. 1.National Core for Neuroethics, Division of Neurology, Department of MedicineThe University of British ColumbiaVancouverCanada

Personalised recommendations